Marshall et al v. Burnley et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal (Dkt. 12) is considered as an objection to the Magistrate Judge's order of June 8, 2017, and is hereby DENIED. Signed by District Judge J. Thomas Marten on 07/17/2017. Mailed to pro se party Krystal M. Marshall and Milton J. Davison at 935 N Beech St, Wichita, KS 67206 by regular mail. (aa)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
KRYSTAL MARSHALL and
Case No. 17-1090-JTM-KGG
BREAKING BENJAMIN, et al.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal (Dkt. 12). Out of an
abundance of caution, the court will treat this notice as an objection to Magistrate Judge
Gale’s order of June 8, 2017, denying plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint. See
Dkts. 9, 10.
Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint on June 6, 2017. Dkt. 9. Judge
Gale denied the motion on June 8, 2017, pointing out that the local rules of this court
require a motion to amend a complaint to include the proposed amended complaint as
an attachment. Plaintiffs’ motion did not include such an attachment. Judge Gale denied
the motion to amend without prejudice, meaning plaintiffs could refile their motion to
amend the complaint provided they complied with the rule.
Judge Gale’s determination was clearly correct. Rule 15.1(a) of the Rules of
Practice for the District of Kansas requires a party filing a motion to amend a pleading
to attach the proposed pleading.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED this 17th day of July, 2017, that plaintiffs’ Notice
of Appeal (Dkt. 12) is considered as an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s order of June
8, 2017, and is hereby DENIED.
___s/ J. Thomas Marten_____
J. THOMAS MARTEN, JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?